I understand that, but the old one isn't actually about NV. It's 35 pages of OR posts. Searching on the board is hard enough as it is, and the 2 Bundy standoffs are already confusing. Changing from OR to NV 35 pages into a thread makes no sense. I specifically titled this one identically to Mike's to keep the trial stuff together.

Thanks Sugar! Can anyone do a summary (or point to summarizing posts) on what the current state of all of these threads are for those of us wandering over from the collapse of our 10-page a day Y'all Qaeda habit that don't have it in us to read 35 more pages?

"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

Slartibartfast wrote:Thanks Sugar! Can anyone do a summary (or point to summarizing posts) on what the current state of all of these threads are for those of us wandering over from the collapse of our 10-page a day Y'all Qaeda habit that don't have it in us to read 35 more pages?

Mike's OR thread has a list of the arrestees (although I think the group with Blaine Cooper, maybe?) related to the NV standoff because he's way more organized than I am and probably a better typist. There's a bunch of OR stuff in the other NV thread because it got renamed from OR to NV after 35 pages. This one was my attempt to have a place to put the Cliven Bundy stuff from 2 years ago in NV.

So Santilli, who's prancing around fancying himself as an embedded reporter (remember his ill fated trip to the Mexican border?) now finds himself indicted or about to be indicted in two separate district courts. He'll be spending the next two years in court and then the following 10-15 in prison. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy. I hope the ACLU drops him now like the hot pistol that he is.

Same is true about Cliven's fellow co-conspirators. How many of his own children can Cliven get incarcerated as members of his gang?

It's arguable that he was more reporter than participant in OR, but he was clearly an active participant, partner, and conspirator in NV. It's no wonder the DOJ pushed so hard to keep him detained - they knew that Santilli would be in a couple of worlds more hurt by the time this indictment hit the press.

Cliven's indictment also appears to me (at a first and fast read) to include factual observations from within Bundy's camp. I'm not sure whether that was sourced through media or whether there is an informant or inside man. It's probably not especially wise to speculate until and unless additional information is made public.

In a wilderness of mirrors, what will the spider do beyond the circuit of the shuddering Bear in fractured atoms? -TS Eliot (somewhat modified)

Cliven Bundy
Born on a Monday
Stole on a Tuesday
Insurrectionist on a Wednesday
Arrested on a Thursday
Stood trial on a Friday
Convicted on a Saturday
Imprisoned on a Sunday
That was the end of Cliven Bundy.

Cliven will never get out of prison -- assuming he is convicted. And I expect many, many more arrests. And if the ACLU thinks it can help get Santilli out of jail for the Oregon occupation, it will be a futile mission. Santilli is going to be spending a lot of time in prison for the 2014 Nevada "standoff," and he's not going to get bail.

Does anybody remember if we have SaintSilly clips from the Nevada Standoff in a thread on TFB? Do I need to search Youtube for remnants, if yes, anybody have a direct link for me before hunting myself? Thanks!

Aside from the fact that I find Santilli really really annoying, is there a real chance he will be indicted for his actions in 2014 at the Bundy Ranch?

The affidavit supporting the criminal complaint against Cliven Bundy for the 2014 Bundy Ranch conspiracy contains copious damning quotes from co-conspirator No. 4, quotes which have been reliably traced back to Santilli. So I think it's very likely that Santilli will be named in the indictment which will eventually supersede the criminal complaint.

In fact at first I was puzzled why you would consider the issue doubtful. I've concluded that your question is prompted by the absence of an obvious reason why Santilli is referred to anonymously as "co-conspirator" rather than being named as one of the defendants. Failure to name a co-conspirator can certainly sometimes reflect a policy decision not to prosecute a particular individual. Cheney, as I recall, was named anonymously as a co-conspirator in the Scooter Libby indictment but never charged. I doubt that a similar decision has been made not to prosecute Santilli here.

So why wasn't he named? My guess is as follows. The FBI has been working on this for a while. While I've never worked in law enforcement, I'm sure that such charging documents go through multiple revisions. I suspect that for a lengthy investigation, an effort is made to have a version ready at all times in usable final form (final form requiring multiple sign-offs from FBI & Justice Department management) for instant use if circumstances dictate an immediate arrest. But management sign-offs take work and time, so you don't update the "ready for immediate use version" every time the ongoing investigation turns up some new nuggets. Plus I suspect that the lawyers and FBI agents working on this had lots of other projects on their plate.

My guess is that the Bundy complaint was put into substantially its present form sometime in 2014, with the expectation that it would be used to arrest Bundy first, and then serve as a template for subsequent operations against the other 4, who were spread out in different locations. I'm also guessing that one of the reasons it wasn't used immediately was that arresting Bundy peacefully at his ranch presented difficulties. The government was probably still trying to come up with a satisfactory tactical plan while simultaneously hoping that a chance to jump him would emerge serendipitously.

When the Malheur occupation started to ramp up, I imagine that work on the Bundy Ranch 2014 complaint moved to the back burner as resources were shifted to Oregon. When the government realized this week that Bundy was about to drop himself into its lap at PDX, they probably grabbed last year's most recent "ready-to-go" version, did a quick check to make sure that subsequent events hadn't rendered any of it ill-advised, and then went ahead and filed it. A new version will issue in due course to arrest Santilli, but there's no urgency. He's not going anywhere. And come to think of it, if discussions have already started between the government and Santilli's lawyer, the government might want to use the fact that Santilli had not yet been indicted in the earlier event as an incentive for him to cut a deal ASAP.

Anyhow, complete speculation and excessively long-winded (it's a character flaw some of you may have already noticed), so take it for what it's worth.

Slartibartfast wrote:Thanks Sugar! Can anyone do a summary (or point to summarizing posts) on what the current state of all of these threads are for those of us wandering over from the collapse of our 10-page a day Y'all Qaeda habit that don't have it in us to read 35 more pages?

Mike's OR thread has a list of the arrestees (although I think the group with Blaine Cooper, maybe?) related to the NV standoff because he's way more organized than I am and probably a better typist. There's a bunch of OR stuff in the other NV thread because it got renamed from OR to NV after 35 pages. This one was my attempt to have a place to put the Cliven Bundy stuff from 2 years ago in NV.

Or not.

The group with Blain Cooper were actually arrested, at least as far as I can tell from the brief indictment, for their Oregon actions. I believe Cliven is the only one (as of when I went to sleep 6.5 hours ago) to be arrested for anything related to the NV standoff.

"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

Aside from the fact that I find Santilli really really annoying, is there a real chance he will be indicted for his actions in 2014 at the Bundy Ranch?

The affidavit supporting the criminal complaint against Cliven Bundy for the 2014 Bundy Ranch conspiracy contains copious damning quotes from co-conspirator No. 4, quotes which have been reliably traced back to Santilli. So I think it's very likely that Santilli will be named in the indictment which will eventually supersede the criminal complaint.

In fact at first I was puzzled why you would consider the issue doubtful. I've concluded that your question is prompted by the absence of an obvious reason why Santilli is referred to anonymously as "co-conspirator" rather than being named as one of the defendants. Failure to name a co-conspirator can certainly sometimes reflect a policy decision not to prosecute a particular individual. Cheney, as I recall, was named anonymously as a co-conspirator in the Scooter Libby indictment but never charged. I doubt that a similar decision has been made not to prosecute Santilli here.

So why wasn't he named? My guess is as follows. The FBI has been working on this for a while. While I've never worked in law enforcement, I'm sure that such charging documents go through multiple revisions. I suspect that for a lengthy investigation, an effort is made to have a version ready at all times in usable final form (final form requiring multiple sign-offs from FBI & Justice Department management) for instant use if circumstances dictate an immediate arrest. But management sign-offs take work and time, so you don't update the "ready for immediate use version" every time the ongoing investigation turns up some new nuggets. Plus I suspect that the lawyers and FBI agents working on this had lots of other projects on their plate.

My guess is that the Bundy complaint was put into substantially its present form sometime in 2014, with the expectation that it would be used to arrest Bundy first, and then serve as a template for subsequent operations against the other 4, who were spread out in different locations. I'm also guessing that one of the reasons it wasn't used immediately was that arresting Bundy peacefully at his ranch presented difficulties. The government was probably still trying to come up with a satisfactory tactical plan while simultaneously hoping that a chance to jump him would emerge serendipitously.

When the Malheur occupation started to ramp up, I imagine that work on the Bundy Ranch 2014 complaint moved to the back burner as resources were shifted to Oregon. When the government realized this week that Bundy was about to drop himself into its lap at PDX, they probably grabbed last year's most recent "ready-to-go" version, did a quick check to make sure that subsequent events hadn't rendered any of it ill-advised, and then went ahead and filed it. A new version will issue in due course to arrest Santilli, but there's no urgency. He's not going anywhere. And come to think of it, if discussions have already started between the government and Santilli's lawyer, the government might want to use the fact that Santilli had not yet been indicted in the earlier event as an incentive for him to cut a deal ASAP.

Anyhow, complete speculation and excessively long-winded (it's a character flaw some of you may have already noticed), so take it for what it's worth.

Thanks, that's helpful. I find Santilli so really really annoying that my desire for him to be arrested for any and all infractions clouds my ability to rationally analyze his situation.

“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

The complaint does not name those co-conspirators, but details in the document make it possible to identify them as Cliven Bundy’s sons Ryan and Ammon Bundy, Montana militia leader Ryan Payne and Internet broadcasterPeter Santilli.

“On April 12, Bundy and his co-conspirators organized and led a massive armed assault against federal law enforcement officers,” the complaint states.

“I cannot confirm it, butI suspect that that Co-conspirator 4 may well be Pete Santilli,” said Santilli’s defense attorney, Tom Coan.
Coan said he is preparing for the possibility that his client will face charges in Nevada as well as in Oregon.

“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

Volkonski wrote:
Thanks, that's helpful. I find Santilli so really really annoying that my desire for him to be arrested for any and all infractions clouds my ability to rationally analyze his situation.

You are not the only one. I know two people who really want Santilli in jail for a long time, because he is just that annoying. I find Santilli annoying too, but I will wait for a jury of his peers to pass judgment.

Volkonski wrote:
Thanks, that's helpful. I find Santilli so really really annoying that my desire for him to be arrested for any and all infractions clouds my ability to rationally analyze his situation.

You are not the only one. I know two people who really want Santilli in jail for a long time, because he is just that annoying. I find Santilli annoying too, but I will wait for ajury of his peers to pass judgment.

Where will the courts find 12 people who are as annoying as Santilli?

“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace